Download THE NAMING OF STARS AND THE STUDY OF PROTOSTARS D. R.

Inside the Stars, IAU Colloquium 137
ASP Conference Series, Vol. 40,1993
Werner W. Weiss and Annie Bagttn (eds.)
THE NAMING OF STARS AND THE STUDY OF PROTOSTARS
D. R. 0 . MORRISON
CERN, Geneva 23, Switzerland
ABSTRACT
The logic of naming stars could be based more on physical principles as happened in the naming of resonances in Particle Physics.
A possible system might be based on extensive Monte Carlo studies of
protostars followed by standard Stellar Evolutionary Model calculations.
INTRODUCTION
This IAU Colloquium on "Inside the Stars" has been excellent and I have learnt
a great deal. However as a relative outsider but with experience of a closely
allied branch of Science, I hope you will allow me to make two comments that
may be constructive.
THE NAMING OF STARS
To an outsider, it is hard to find a consistent logic in the names given to stars. In
Particle Physics a similar situation arose in the 1960's and early 1970's, when a
large number of new particles and resonances were discovered. Names were given
to them in an almost random way, using both latin and greek letters and being
based on factors such as the name of the discoverer. Finally the Particle Data
Group, based in LBL, Berkeley, proposed a complete and logical naming system
based on the physical properties of the particles such as their baryon number,
strangeness, mass, spin, parity, etc. Despite some early grumbling, this has been
universally adopted and surprisingly quickly. It is now greatly appreciated and
is now essential in the physical understanding of the subject. It is proposed that
the stars be similarly renamed in terms of their physical properties. Ultimately
this will help in the understanding of the evolution of stars.
HOW TO CLASSIFY STARS?
Although this conferences fulfilled its aim of discussing "Inside the Stars", I was
slightly surprised that there was no review talk about how stars are formed how are the initial conditions of the Evolutionary Models reached, are they all
the same or are there subsequently important differences?
Understanding stars in terms of their observational properties appears to
have been moderately successful, but there seems to be a feeling that it is not
sufficiently perfect to allow stars to be named in a scientific manner. In High
Energy Physics, one is accustomed to groups of physicists doing vast series of
810
Downloaded from https:/www.cambridge.org/core. IP address: 88.99.165.207, on 15 Jun 2017 at 19:32:05, subject to the Cambridge Core
terms of use, available at https:/www.cambridge.org/core/terms. https://doi.org/10.1017/S0252921100018959
Naming of Stars
811
Monte Carlo calculations. This suggests another approach. While Stellar Evolutionary Models are quite successful as we have heard at this Colloquium, the
description of the formation of stars is rather less successful. An understanding
of this may be the real solution to the problem of how to understand and to
classify stars.
It is considered that stars are formed from protostars which are large clouds
of material which mainly under gravity, coalesce to give 1, or 2 or 3 or more
centres. Some of these centres are sufficiently large that they give stars. The
result is that about 65% of stars are in binary systems and less than 15% are
single stars as our Sun. This shows that multiple star systems are normal.
There clearly must be interactions between the various centres, for example our
Sun probably interacted with its surroundings, absorbing material and rotating
strongly, ie it was a T Tauri star in its early history. Other effects such as nearby
supernova explosions, colliding galaxies etc. would also significantly influence
the protostar.
It is hoped that a major project can be started to do Monte Carlo calculations of all possible types of protostars, to follow their development to stars, to
study the interactions of these stars with any other star(s) in the protostar system, and then to follow their evolution up to the present. This is a major project
since there are many possibilities, but it would be a very rewarding project
Later comparison with observations would yield important information. Finally it would be possible to name stars in a relatively simple way according to
their basic physical properties and ufe-history. Then progress and understanding
would be much faster.
Downloaded from https:/www.cambridge.org/core. IP address: 88.99.165.207, on 15 Jun 2017 at 19:32:05, subject to the Cambridge Core
terms of use, available at https:/www.cambridge.org/core/terms. https://doi.org/10.1017/S0252921100018959